Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Good upgrade from 4870

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
June 7, 2010 8:29:32 PM

I currently have a 4870 my new rig will be

OCZ 400w stealth extreme
i5 750
Asus P7P55 LX S1156 P55
4gb dual channel 1600 ram
and the 4870 512

What wuld be a decent upgrade for the card considering the cost to performance factor here? I havent the budget to get the latest card and I was looking at the 5 series of the ATI cards, which one of the series in the midrange will give be noticeably better graphics, not really interested in what benches better as I believe the only way to truely test a card is to have the same rigs setup next to each other on the same display and measure it with the eye etc.

As I'm on a budget as well im trying to bring the cost of the ram down which ram in the cheaper ranges are reliable I don't want to skimp out but would rather get a better graphics card.

Any comments would be greatly appreciated cheers.

And this site rocks!

More about : good upgrade 4870

a c 169 U Graphics card
June 7, 2010 8:38:17 PM

A 5870 would give you about double the performance of your 4870,so it would be a great upgrade.
BTW what resolution do you play at ?
June 7, 2010 8:46:04 PM

i'm surprised that you have been running the 4870 on a 400 watt power supply, as it asks for a 450 watt minimum, but good job that your psu is 80 plus efficient though. Your only upgrade option is the ATI 5850 card which is the only next higher card to the 4870, oh wait there's the 4890 card. But you would definitely need an upgrade in power supply. The ATI 5850 only requires 151 watts of power whereas your card needs 160 watts of power, i have the ATI 4870 card as well and love it, will not upgrade form this card though. In your upgrade make that power supply a 500 watt, i most definitely recommend it, shouldn't really cost that much more, about £50 (total) - you can convert that into dollars. Don't buy the 5770 card because that is more or less the same as your card, it's just smaller and uses less power. it really does not have much FPS increase, infact looking at some graphs they show that the ATI 4870 has slightly more performance than the 5770 card has. If you have say a 19 inch monitor with a 1280 x 1024 resolution don't bother upgrading it, especially if you are on a budget, just buy a good graphics card, a 1280 x 1024 resolution complements a fast graphics card YES IT DOES as it gives you ultimate performance - good for enabling anti-aliasing on high and anisotropic filtering on as high as you can possibly get it. Unless you don't play games like Crysis (COD MW2, very demanding games) then probably get a larger monitor. Having a smaller monitor with great perfomance - 60 - 75 FPS all the time is better than having a larger monitor with a larger resolution and having a load of stutter and your online gaming suffers.
Related resources
a c 365 U Graphics card
June 7, 2010 8:54:45 PM

If the motherboard is CrossFire compatible, I would add in another HD 4870 which should give you the equivalent of the HD 5850 in terms of raw performance. HD 4870 XFire might be a little faster than a HD 5850.

If you are looking for a faster card, then you have to begin with the HD 5830. It is faster than your current HD 4870, however, the incremental increase in performance is not justifiable. That leaves the HD 5850 as the "best bang for the buck".

Otherwise, I will simply stick with your HD 4870. It will save you money on your build and you can start saving up money for a HD 5850. By then maybe the price will drop a tiny bit.
a c 1411 U Graphics card
June 7, 2010 8:58:36 PM

HD5850 and a new PSU
June 7, 2010 9:00:45 PM

4870 512meg in crossfire... defeats the purpose of the extra horsepower to only have that much vram.

Stick with what you have till you can get a 5870 and a new PSU.
June 7, 2010 9:14:39 PM

I play on a 42" 1080p and ye i agree i love the 4870 card and think its awesome but my main folly with it is the amount of ram it has and the fact that ive done all these other upgrades only thing left is the card. It seems to be a tie with the 5850 and the 5970

Fair does wasnt expecting a reply that quick now that was bloody service!
cheers.
June 7, 2010 9:21:46 PM

Ram wise im stuck between the corsair dominator 8-8-8-24 and the ocz platinum 7-7-7-24 the ocz's seem to overclock like a bitch not sure about the corsair though but id imagine i wouldnt go far wrong with either. My question is, is there anye cheaper than the one listed above that are considered as reliable but being cheaper with exclusion to Kingston?
a b U Graphics card
June 7, 2010 9:27:26 PM

Just like rolli said, get a 5850 and a new PSU and you will be good to go. A 5870 at this point in time is non-sense, many overclocked 5850's can surpass the performance of a 5870 for much less. Buy smart, save money for other upgrades..
June 7, 2010 10:16:48 PM

OvrClkr said:
Just like rolli said, get a 5850 and a new PSU and you will be good to go. A 5870 at this point in time is non-sense, many overclocked 5850's can surpass the performance of a 5870 for much less. Buy smart, save money for other upgrades..


cheers for the advice guys really appreciated and ye i agree best bang for buck is the best way and i was going to be doing the psu and the card at the same time.
June 7, 2010 10:53:29 PM

that sounds like an interesting idea, he'd need a 600 watt psu though? or a 650 watt? Would it really save that much money, and also i wonder how far of the 5870 is from the ATI 4870x2 card representing 4870 in cross fire. But then he already has one 4870, so yeah another 4870 would be alot cheaper and a 600 or 650 watt powerr supply would really not cost that much more than a 500 watt psu i suppose. But i really don't know about the temperatures though, those cards really do get hot and it almost seems like a definate factor that he'd have to buy an aftermarket cooler for both cards especially if he ever wanted to overclock it. The ATI 4870 gets up to 87 degrees in my experience with an adequate cooling system. It's because the stock cooler really is bollocks lol, i opened mine up and it was a very small bit of heatsink with a small 60 mm fan or soo which was distanced away from the heatsink anyway, embarrassing - needed the arctic accelero twin turbo pro.
a c 124 U Graphics card
June 7, 2010 11:01:21 PM

miko999 said:
I play on a 42" 1080p and ye i agree i love the 4870 card and think its awesome but my main folly with it is the amount of ram it has and the fact that ive done all these other upgrades only thing left is the card. It seems to be a tie with the 5850 and the 5970

Fair does wasnt expecting a reply that quick now that was bloody service!
cheers.


Not exactly. The 5850 will be a moderate improvement although you'll also get DX11. The 5870 will be a decent improvement, and the 5970 is a huge improvement, but IMO you would be better off with crossfire 5850s and that'll save at least $100 than a 5970. I have mine crossfired and overclocked for much better performance than a stock 5970... and those also have trouble OCing even tho they use the 5870 cores.

Things to consider tho are how big your case is and whether the mobo supports crossfire. If it does, your cheapest and still great upgrade is a 2nd 4870 then 1 5850, 1 5870, 2x5850/5970, 2x5870.
June 7, 2010 11:09:17 PM

QUAD ATI 4870 LOL YERRRRR.... it is the way to go ;D
June 7, 2010 11:22:43 PM

it's just a futile attempt to get over the graphical inefficiency of windows. One ATI 4890 aught to really play Crysis or Battlefield Bad Company 2 at highest settings with aa and af and get an easy 75 FPS. Just that windows really isn't optimised for games; it's just for status really and for image to have a quad configuration of graphics cards lol. i mean you can't seriously just buy 4 graphics cards just to play games like COD MW2 and Bad Company 2 at highest settings with aa and af. Really? because games console would be a better option, but i don't like games consoles because of the restrictions, the lack of unique and creativity that they have, perhaps too many children play on them as well, so computers feel maturer lol, they aught to.
June 8, 2010 12:15:56 AM

but mostly it's just for status and the image it makes of your computer. Also to be impressed by it as well. But still, it really doesn't justify it buying 4 graphics cards lol just to game, it suggests that you really really like gaming and you really need that level of performance. There must be more to do with 4 graphics cards other than game? Please brief me on what else these cards can do. For me i'd just wait over time until graphics tech gets better and then get one smaller, less power consuming and powerful graphics card enough to play bad company 2 with good FPS, just like those 128mb min games get great performance with the ATI 4870. But that will probably be about 1-2 years before we will see that happening and that sucks lol. It seems that the ATI 5850 really is just to play those 128mb min games at top settings with alot of performance, playing those new games you'd probably get away on medium settings with 4aa and 8af if you want to experience good perfomance. That's probably good but $300 - £250 for me is alot of money to pay for that and to be honest it would be a better option to play those new games on the xbox 360 because the graphics do look really good - better than medium on pc really - perhaps high on pc with aa and af but not ultra high. Performance is greatly important especially online it sucks when you have stutter.
June 8, 2010 1:29:31 AM

other main point is 2 4870 would be good but i wouldnt get driectx 11 this is extremely important in my upgrade choices.

dunno always thought 360 graphics sucked @ss to be honest.
a c 169 U Graphics card
June 8, 2010 6:40:12 AM

OvrClkr said:
Just like rolli said, get a 5850 and a new PSU and you will be good to go. A 5870 at this point in time is non-sense, many overclocked 5850's can surpass the performance of a 5870 for much less. Buy smart, save money for other upgrades..

I don't think it doesn't make any sense to buy a 5870,because although many buy a 5850 and OC it,but many don't do it :) 
June 8, 2010 12:57:56 PM

does the ATI 4870 not being directx 11 mean that it can't actually run it? I mean seeing how vista can run dx11? So your saying that games running under the directx 11 cards will look slightly better than under the ati 4870? I also see that directx 11 isn't too much of a performance lost compared with 10, do those older games show the benfits though of directx 11 like cod 4? I'm sure some don't support the benefits of directx 10? Those games like Far Cry (1)?
a c 169 U Graphics card
June 8, 2010 2:04:40 PM

4870 supports DX10.1,so even if you use in a OS that features DX11 like Windows7/Vista SP2,your card will still work in DX10/10.1
And DX11 won't work on games like COD4 and FC,because they don't support it.
June 8, 2010 2:21:16 PM

directx 11 only works in the newer games like MW2? It depends how much of an improvement directx 11 is over dirextx 10.1 in quality, and also consider price, if the 4870 is quite a bit cheaper no point going for the new ATI cards. He could always sell his current ATI 4870. Then buy a new ATI card though.
a c 124 U Graphics card
June 8, 2010 3:34:44 PM

Nashsafc said:
directx 11 only works in the newer games like MW2? It depends how much of an improvement directx 11 is over dirextx 10.1 in quality, and also consider price, if the 4870 is quite a bit cheaper no point going for the new ATI cards. He could always sell his current ATI 4870. Then buy a new ATI card though.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_with_DirectX...

MW2 is not DX11. Only games programmed with DX11 can support it. The biggest difference is lighting/shading and tesslation for crystal clear graphics.

If you check THIS THREAD out you'll see in the top post 2 images of a table with stuff on it. Maximize them and look at the cup, the stick-box with spheres on the corners (guessing that's supposed to be an atomic structure) and the pencil, you'll notice that in DX11 they're a lot smoother. That's tesslation at work.

On the second page at the end there's some screens of lighting effects, and again the DX11 shot looks really intense.

Biggest draw backs are that in a game like Metro 2033 you take a big hit to FPS if you're not running high end cards. A lot of the guys posting there are on a single 5850 and it drastically lowered their FPS so that's worth considering if getting a DX11 card. It's either DX11 and lower settings or DX 10 and max settings. I have crossfire 5850s and the game runs super smooth at maximum settings DX11 1920x1080 although there was some minor frame slowdown when I went outside (still around 30 min).
June 8, 2010 3:37:37 PM

Nashsafc said:
it's just a futile attempt to get over the graphical inefficiency of windows. One ATI 4890 aught to really play Crysis or Battlefield Bad Company 2 at highest settings with aa and af and get an easy 75 FPS. Just that windows really isn't optimised for games; it's just for status really and for image to have a quad configuration of graphics cards lol. i mean you can't seriously just buy 4 graphics cards just to play games like COD MW2 and Bad Company 2 at highest settings with aa and af. Really? because games console would be a better option, but i don't like games consoles because of the restrictions, the lack of unique and creativity that they have, perhaps too many children play on them as well, so computers feel maturer lol, they aught to.


Hey Dude

I'm 40 & have a PS3 (spares my computer for work / media / downloading / capture / transcoding & etc) Pretty broad generalisation there. The PS3 when hooked to your Network is also an excellent streaming Media Player from your NAS/Networked PC to your living room & saves buying any additional devices. Settle down - I'm all growed up now Mister!!!!
a b U Graphics card
June 8, 2010 3:39:43 PM

I can report no issues running crossfire 4870 512mb cards, great performance all around at 1920x1080. I ran a 4870x2 last summer with my OC'd x3, so it is hard to compare, considering the CPU change, but the addition of the second 4870 a couple weeks ago has been awesome, hah. I am missing out on DX11, but am happy enough with my DX10 performance to wait for Bulldozer/6xxx before I invest any more money into my rig.
a b U Graphics card
June 8, 2010 3:49:14 PM

widowson said:
Hey Dude

I'm 40 & have a PS3 (spares my computer for work / media / downloading / capture / transcoding & etc) Pretty broad generalisation there. The PS3 when hooked to your Network is also an excellent streaming Media Player from your NAS/Networked PC to your living room & saves buying any additional devices. Settle down - I'm all growed up now Mister!!!!


I am the same way, I use my PS3 for gaming and streaming media over the network (via Tversity), as well as occasional internet use while the wife is on the PC. The anti-console attitude that is all too common amongst elitist PC users is understandable in some ways (crappy console ports for example) but to paint us with the kiddy brush is an old stereotype, more embarrassing to the subscriber than to the stereotyped. I hope I still have a sense of humor at 40, feeling pretty crotchety and cynical at 31 as it is, hah.
June 8, 2010 3:55:58 PM

yes you might as well buy another 4870 probably. Would probably be the most seinsible idea, if it was best bang for the buck. Also yes i noticed there are lot of adults playing on game consoles, and to be honest the age structure of playing games comparing the pc and the conole is probably the same. Just that certain games are much much better on computer than they are on game consoles, for instance command and conquer is designed for the computer, the two things are bonded together lol. It just doesn't feel the same on the xbox 360/ps3; you get half as many maps as you do on computer (as standard without updates on pc), and you only get 4 players as compared to 8 on the computer for online player and single player. There are loads of maps/mods available to download for free on pc version, and controlling an rts game with the xbox 360 is really hard if you are used to mouse and keyboard since it's just a faster option to select units and move the map around. Graphics are certainly better on computer than the console as i noticed much more detail on mammoth tanks on the computer; you could see detail right down to window depth and you don't even need that good a graphics card to play the game at highest settings with 4 aa; i think a 8800GT will do perfectly for even Red Alert 3 with 256mb. A big big thing to mention is that you actually get limited on the game to how many units you can build; i built 25 venom aircraft and then tried to build some avatars, but it only let me build 5 of them! On computer there is no limit and considering graphics isn't laggy you can have the whole entire screen covered with your army. Oblivion is better too with the command console, but graphics are really laggy though even with a high end card; the game must be written badly. Lol perhaps the reason why i notice soo many young people on the consoles is because of the microphone headset on the 360 lol, you don't realise on pc who you are playing against as people don't tend to use headsets in my experience.
a c 124 U Graphics card
June 8, 2010 4:12:18 PM

Let's try to not turn this into a console vs pc thread... lol. PCs are superior in many many ways but consoles are great too. End of story. I like both my PC and my PS3 for different reasons.
June 8, 2010 6:03:56 PM

Believe I'll be going with another 4870 and a better psu this is the best performance for cost as other people have said and the 5850 with Directx 11 on low doesnt appeal to me in this case, it will be that or a 4870x2 not sure yet one other thing to note is I have a HIS 4870 i don't know whether its the superiority of the HIS build but the card has survived 3 computer meltdowns and a negative to negative power charge from one of those molex to PCIE 6 pin connectors when this thing was plugged in, the wires plugged into the card friggin melted and smoked the whole computer everything but the card died its also been dropped and stood on the damn thing refuses to die ATI all the way for me from now on.

Back on topic I remember reading a while ago (when crossfire was new) that it didn't offer massive advantages but mainly some increase and more vram i can't remember why that was but im guessing the games or Windows wasn't optimised for it.

What sort of performance gains would I get from 2 4870 512's?
Would it compete with a 4870x2?
Do you have to use the same chipset or could i use say an Asus with say a HIS?

As always appreciate all of your advice.

wolfram23 said:
Let's try to not turn this into a console vs pc thread... lol. PCs are superior in many many ways but consoles are great too. End of story. I like both my PC and my PS3 for different reasons.


I agree enthusiasts have both.
a b U Graphics card
June 8, 2010 6:22:39 PM

miko999 said:
Believe I'll be going with another 4870 and a better psu this is the best performance for cost as other people have said and the 5850 with Directx 11 on low doesnt appeal to me in this case, it will be that or a 4870x2 not sure yet one other thing to note is I have a HIS 4870 i don't know whether its the superiority of the HIS build but the card has survived 3 computer meltdowns and a negative to negative power charge from one of those molex to PCIE 6 pin connectors when this thing was plugged in, the wires plugged into the card friggin melted and smoked the whole computer everything but the card died its also been dropped and stood on the damn thing refuses to die ATI all the way for me from now on.

Back on topic I remember reading a while ago (when crossfire was new) that it didn't offer massive advantages but mainly some increase and more vram i can't remember why that was but im guessing the games or Windows wasn't optimised for it.

What sort of performance gains would I get from 2 4870 512's?
Would it compete with a 4870x2?
Do you have to use the same chipset or could i use say an Asus with say a HIS?

As always appreciate all of your advice.



I agree enthusiasts have both.


If you look at http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/charts/gaming-graphics-ca... Which is total FPS at all resolutions you can see 2 x 4870 512mb performs better than 2 x 5770 or 1 x 5870 and even 2 x 4870 1Gb and slightly worse than 2 x GTX 260 in SLi
a b U Graphics card
June 8, 2010 6:28:33 PM

Sorry the 2 x 1GB 4870 was the 4870 x2 not 2 x 4870
June 8, 2010 6:57:29 PM

it really aught to perform exactly the same as the 4870x2. After all it's the same two chips just put onto one card? But then the 4870x2 might be 2x1gb, in that case it will be exactly the same to 2 x 1gb ATI 4870s. It should really be so? I thought the xbox 360 and ps3 were just of standard now lol, almost everyboday has one, but not many people have a powerful computer, that's why consoles - ps3 and xbox 360 aren't interesting to me. I have an xbox 360 too but my brother has it at the moment since we paid half and half for it - he's at university, at no loss since i have my computer but can't really ultimately play the latest games at happy settings. Games consoles i would say are best for playing the latest games to be honest, and then as time goes on computers are able to properly master the game. Except now consoles can run on HD TVs and pc monitors lol, i agree obviously consoles are just better in that sort of sense. Just really annoyed at the cheap build quality of the xbox 360 in it's small stupid case and the really loud fans make me want to stay with my computer, typical red ring of death made me happy to move to pc, ps3 certianly wasn't an alternative as the graphics are more or less the same and wouldn't offer any freedom over customisation of games.
June 8, 2010 7:14:28 PM

commenting on wolfram on that link of dx11, but it shows a comparison between dx9 and dx11, and i wanted to see the difference between dx10.1 and dx11 really.
a c 124 U Graphics card
June 8, 2010 7:23:18 PM

Obviously it's a different card so it's not going to be identical, but with 2 5850s I saw increases anywhere from ~30% to as high as 90% better frames.

If you're interested in more benchmarks, I ran a bunch on FurMark, Crysis, Dirt 2, STALKER: CoP, RE5, and AVP.
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/289809-33-single-5850...
a c 124 U Graphics card
June 8, 2010 7:25:21 PM

Nashsafc said:
commenting on wolfram on that link of dx11, but it shows a comparison between dx9 and dx11, and i wanted to see the difference between dx10.1 and dx11 really.


Just go to page 5 of the thread, the last post a guy took a pic of dx9, dx10, dx11 so you can see that dx9 and 10 look very similar but dx11 adds a lot of lighting effect.
June 8, 2010 7:35:38 PM

but it actually looks more vivid with tesselation off. I'm sure there are better examples to show dx11's improvement. But it looks like the quality improvement is minimul, and performance wise if dx 11 looses alot more frames then it seems much better to go for a lower dx and enable anti-aliasing and aniso-topic filtering that are the real quality attraction. It really seems like it depends on how you see best qaulity; sometimes darker images can look better if their shading looks deeper. But sometiems vibrant images look better, because the picture looks brighter and more lively, but in a way both pictures look as good as each other, just that it depends on your colour mood.
a c 124 U Graphics card
June 8, 2010 9:03:44 PM

Nashsafc said:
but it actually looks more vivid with tesselation off. I'm sure there are better examples to show dx11's improvement. But it looks like the quality improvement is minimul, and performance wise if dx 11 looses alot more frames then it seems much better to go for a lower dx and enable anti-aliasing and aniso-topic filtering that are the real quality attraction. It really seems like it depends on how you see best qaulity; sometimes darker images can look better if their shading looks deeper. But sometiems vibrant images look better, because the picture looks brighter and more lively, but in a way both pictures look as good as each other, just that it depends on your colour mood.


Yes I agree, and some people probably prefer the DX10 lighting over the DX11. I also just read that Metro only applies tesslation to characters. Regardless, IMO the best graphics come from highest textures + AA + AF. Everything else is just extra (but I like extras too :p )
June 8, 2010 9:03:47 PM

can i crossfire different chipsets of the same card. for example Asus and an xfx 4870?
a b U Graphics card
June 8, 2010 9:11:10 PM

miko999 said:
can i crossfire different chipsets of the same card. for example Asus and an xfx 4870?



yes you can, but it might look funky...
June 8, 2010 9:51:20 PM

miko999 said:
can i crossfire different chipsets of the same card. for example Asus and an xfx 4870?


to add on to that is it possible to cross fire a 512mb model with a 1gb model of the ATI 4870. What about an overclocked version with a standard version. I'm guessing it is possible to put together two different memory size versions and that when you put together an overclocked version it down clocks the oc version to the standard clock of the ordinary one am i correct? hmm not sure about xfx, i'd go for sapphire toxic or asus, unless you are really trying to keep it on a strict budget. You need a 600 watt psu btw also to consider or probably a 650 watt.
a b U Graphics card
June 8, 2010 10:11:43 PM

From the FAQs at the top of the forum "Do the cards have to be same model?
For "Most" Nvidia cards the answer is yes,but there are some exceptions too like pairing a GTS 250 with a 9800GTX+,which can be done if both cards have the same amount of memory since the GTS 250 is actually a re-badged 9800GTX+ but again there are some cards like 9800GT and 8800GT which have the same specifications but in general you can't pair them in SLI,some users have reported that by flashing a 8800GT's BIOS to a 9800GT's BIOS,you can do it,but its risky and not recommended.
I wrote about the cards which have different names but can be used in SLI mode in the "Model's section" down this post,other than those all other cards must be same model in order to run in SLI mode.
but about AMD/ATI models,for models like X1900 series and lower you have to use the same/master card to use CrossFire but for HD 2xxx series and up,check the compatibility chart on top of this post.
For Nvidia cards,here is an example:
You have a NVIDIA Geforce 7800GTX 256, and you want to add another card , the second card has to be 7800GTX exactly.

But what about the memory? Can you add a 7800GTX 512 and use that with 7800GTX 256?
It's recommended to use a 7800GTX 256 with a 7800GTX 256 and 7800GTX 512 with 7800GTX 512.
However you can use a 7800GTX 256 with 7800GTX 512 , BUT the 7800GTX 512 will lower its RAM to 256MB to operate with the other card, so it wont have its true power. (This option isn't recommended. )


What about brands ?
Well the brand doesn't matter , again for example , you can use a XFX card with a EVGA card , or a SAPPHIRE card with a DIAMOND card , just make sure they have the same memory and same clocks.

What will happend if 2 cards have the same amount of memory but one has higher clocks than the other?
One of the best ways to learn is to make examples.
You have a 8800GT(Normal edition,no OverClocks) and you want to add another 8800GT(Which is OverClocked),then:

1_The OverClocked one will lower its clocks to reach the Non-OverClocked card.

2_You can OverClock your card(The one that has Stock frequencies) and reach the OverClocked card.
Remember, you cant ALWAYS OverClock the normal card to reach the other card,because it may not OverClock that much and may become unstable.

WARNING:There are many exceptions in Computer Hardware, for example "Mousemonkey" (a trusted member in this forum) has told me that when he puts his ASUS 7900GT card (Which is at stock speeds) with a XFX 7900GT(A OverClocked card) the ASUS one raise its clock to reach the XFX one which is an exception and there are lots of exceptions in Computer Hardware."
a c 124 U Graphics card
June 8, 2010 10:11:47 PM

If combining a 1gb with 512mb you will only get 512mb on both. As for clocks however, it depends. I've heard of sometimes one upclocks sometimes one downclocks. I'd recommend getting the same memory and not overclocked cards. Overclocking is easy, it takes a while tho several hours to thorougly get it right but it's not difficult.
June 8, 2010 10:44:19 PM

just curious miko, what brand ATI 4870 do you have currently, i have a "gecube" one and have stuck on a third party cooler.
June 9, 2010 1:58:24 AM

Nashsafc said:
hmm not sure about xfx, i'd go for sapphire toxic or asus,


They were just for example purposes first thing that came to my head. Most likely go with an Asus, wouldnt touch sapphire if my life depended on it.

Nashsafc said:
just curious miko, what brand ATI 4870 do you have currently, i have a "gecube" one and have stuck on a third party cooler.


I have a HIS radeon 4870 512.

So i could buy an ASUS and it should defo work then? seems to be mixed opinions on this.

simon12 said:
From the FAQs at the top of the forum "Do the cards have to be same model?


Doesn't seem to be any ATi in those examples, there all Nvidia cards. I ask because the HIS card is hard to find these days. Another reason why i'm asking is guidelines are great but facts from real people maybe even some from people who may have even tested such a setup is so much better imo, I like facts.



My motherboard Asus P7P55 LX has 2 x16 pcie slots but on the asus website one of them is rated @4x when in crossfire, would this hamper performance much?
a b U Graphics card
June 9, 2010 11:27:22 AM

miko999 said:
They were just for example purposes first thing that came to my head. Most likely go with an Asus, wouldnt touch sapphire if my life depended on it.



I have a HIS radeon 4870 512.

So i could buy an ASUS and it should defo work then? seems to be mixed opinions on this.



Doesn't seem to be any ATi in those examples, there all Nvidia cards. I ask because the HIS card is hard to find these days. Another reason why i'm asking is guidelines are great but facts from real people maybe even some from people who may have even tested such a setup is so much better imo, I like facts.



My motherboard Asus P7P55 LX has 2 x16 pcie slots but on the asus website one of them is rated @4x when in crossfire, would this hamper performance much?

My previous post says that brand does not matter as long as they have the same ram and clock speeds. Though I think this is now irrelevant as I think the 4X slot will make crossfire no faster than a single card. (8X would be fine only 1-3% slower than 16X)
a c 169 U Graphics card
June 9, 2010 1:34:49 PM

miko999 said:
They were just for example purposes first thing that came to my head. Most likely go with an Asus, wouldnt touch sapphire if my life depended on it.



I have a HIS radeon 4870 512.

So i could buy an ASUS and it should defo work then? seems to be mixed opinions on this.



Doesn't seem to be any ATi in those examples, there all Nvidia cards. I ask because the HIS card is hard to find these days. Another reason why i'm asking is guidelines are great but facts from real people maybe even some from people who may have even tested such a setup is so much better imo, I like facts.



My motherboard Asus P7P55 LX has 2 x16 pcie slots but on the asus website one of them is rated @4x when in crossfire, would this hamper performance much?

I didn't include ATI examples,because its pretty much the same(the cards have to be identical).
So you get the same results for the ATI cards as well.
And for your motherboard,i don't recommend CF,because it will perform at 16x4x which will give you a big performance hit compared to dual 8x/16x,so stick with one GPU IMO.
June 9, 2010 2:18:58 PM

Maziar said:
I didn't include ATI examples,because its pretty much the same(the cards have to be identical).
So you get the same results for the ATI cards as well.
And for your motherboard,i don't recommend CF,because it will perform at 16x4x which will give you a big performance hit compared to dual 8x/16x,so stick with one GPU IMO.


k thanks for that mate, so rule of thumb the same.

and cheers to everyone whose replied, been great.
a b U Graphics card
June 9, 2010 2:38:56 PM

I researched the hell out of CF on x16/x4 motherboards with my last Mobo (780g x16/x4) and what I found was dissapointing, but enlightening. I had Limited time with a second 4870 on my old mobo, and I could never get it to even activate. Didn't bother trying to figure it out, for good reason.

Scaling maxes at at about 25% when adding a second 4870 for crossfire on a x4 slot. This is because in crossfire, all things must be equal between the two cards, thus if one card is limited to x4, the other must be as well. A 4870 cannot reach full potential on a x4 slot, therefore, The very best you can achieve is 2x crippled 4870s.

With a strong enough CPU and x8/x8 slots at the least, 4870s will approach 75-90% scaling in crossfire, depending on the title. Considering the potential of CF4870, one would almost be better off crossfiring 4770s (or 5670s) on a x16/x4 motherboard for similar performance as CF4870 on x16/x4 (as those cards aren't as limited by a x4 slot)
June 9, 2010 11:05:36 PM

Thats what I love about forums, very informative there looks like I'll just be sticking a decent single card in, when the time is right and stick with my current 4870
June 9, 2010 11:23:44 PM

it's because you're on tomshardware which is very popular, it implies you will get a response very quickly, and most people are very happy to help because they like to exercise their knowledge on what they know as their passions. Sometimes you could argue for simple problems forums are better than tech support, because with tech support you may have to wait for long intervals occaisonally to recieve a reply. Also don't really need to thank us lol, it's a pleasure in itself just talking about stuff that we like :) 
!